Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes 12/07/19932625 CITY COUNCIL MEETING Port Angeles, Washington December 7, 1993 CALL TO ORDER - Deputy Mayor Sargent called the special meeting of the Port Angeles City Council SPECIAL MEETING: to order at 6:05 p.m. ROLL CALL: Members Present: Deputy Mayor Sargent, Councilmen Braun, Hulett, Ostrowski, Schueler and Wight. Members Absent: Mayor Hallett. Staff Present: Manager Pomeranz, Attorney Knutson, Deputy Clerk Hagar, B. Collins, K. Godbey, S. Ilk, B. Titus, B. Coons, and K. Ridout. Public Present: L. Doyle, C. McKeown, D. Milligan, A. & H. Mangan, B. Wendel, N. McHenry, C. Alexander, Jr., J. Michalczik, L. Nutter, T. German, J. Newlin, L. Hansen-Carl, C. Miller, J. Seniuk, and J. Honnold. ADJOURN TO The meeting adjourned to Executive Session at 6:05 p.m. to discuss a matter of EXECUTIVE SESSION: litigation and labor negotiations for approximately one-half hour. RETURN TO OPEN The meeting returned to open session at 6:40 p.m. SESSION: Board of Adjustment The Council interviewed Dave Milligan, applicant for the Board of Adjustment. Utility Advisory The Council interviewed the following applicants for the Utility Advisory Committee: Committee Bill Myers and Jerry Hounold. CALL TO ORDER - Deputy Mayor Sargent called the regular meeting of the Port Angeles City Council REGULAR MEETING: to order at 7:25 p.m. PLEDGE OF The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag was led by the Campfire Minihaha Adventure ALLEGIANCE: Group, Donna Ball, Leader. Participating were: Came Dalton, Sarabeth Anderson, Vanessa Ball, Courtney Pittis, and Meghan Peacock. APPROVAL OF Councilman Ostrowski moved to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of MINUTES: November 16, 1993. Councilman Braun seconded the motion, which carried' unanimously. CEREMONIAL 1. Presentation of Check to City of Po.rt Angeles for Bicycle Helmet Program MATTERS/ PROCLAMATIONS: This item was deferred until such time as a representative of U.S. Bank could be present. Bicycle Helmet Program CITY COUNCIL Councilman Hulett attended a Community Action Council meeting; however, there COMMITTEE was nothing of note to report. REPORTS: Councilman Wight attended a Real Estate Committee meeting, recommendations from which are on the agenda as Item E3. Councilman Ostrowski attended the Peninsula Regional Transportation Planning Organization last Friday and was pleased to announce that the Executive Board approved the Port Angeles Multimodal Transportation Center as part of the Regional Transportation System. The project was also endorsed for emergent funding purposes. The City, the Port and Clallam Transit can now seek funds with the - 1 - 2626 CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 7, 1993 CITY COUNCIL support of other agencies within the RTPO. COMMITTEE REPORTS: (Cont'd) Councilman Schueler attended a lengthy meeting of the United Way Allocation Committee; hopefully, fair decisions will be made regarding the allocation of funds to a number of agencies providing human services in the community. Councilman Braun attended two Capital Finance meetings which dealt with concurrency with the school district. He attended an open house held for the Housing Rehabilitation Program on November 19, as well as the first meeting for the new Law and Justice Council, which is dealing with the optional sales tax for Criminal Justice Funding. On November 29, a number of Council members were at the AM/PM to accept a check in the amount of $12,000 from ARCO. He also attended the Real Estate Committee meeting, as well as the budget heatings, and a Clallam County Transit meeting, which dealt with maintenance issues. Several Council members met with the Clallam County Board of Commissioners on the 7th, which dealt with a Landfill issue, and this morning he attended the Pearl Harbor Survivor Group, where a bench with a plaque was dedicated at the Pier. Deputy Mayor Sargent attended many of the same meetings as Councilman Braun. She also performed a ribbon cutting in the Mayor's absence and attended the retirement dinner for Judge Headrick, where she read a proclamation. Deputy Mayor Sargent reminded the Council that she is serving on the search committee for the EDC Director; there are now nine finalists for this position. It is anticipated that interviews will be scheduled for mid-January. FINANCE: None. CONSENT AGENDA: Councilman Ostrowski moved to accept the Consent Agenda, including: (1) Payroll for November 21, 1993 of $336,506.50; and (2) Voucher list for December 3, 1993 of $2,682,658.80. Councilman Hulett seconded the motion. After limited discussion, a vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. ITEMS FROM THE City Manager Pomeranz requested that consideration of a resolution in support of the AUDIENCE/COUNCIL/ optional sales tax for Criminal Justice Funding be added to tonight's agenda. This STAFF TO BE was added under Other Considerations, Item E.7. CONSIDERED OR PLACED ON A FUTURE AGENDA: LEGISLATION: A. Public Hearings 1994 Budget I. 1994 City of Port Angeles Budget City Manager Pomeranz indicated that summaries of the 1994 budget had been distributed to the audience. He provided a brief review of the revenues and expenses of the various funds, and noted that the City is attempting to reduce its base budgets by 10% in order to balance the budget. The goal in the General Fund is to assure the City's revenues and expenses are balanced, a goal which has been accomplished. In 1994, it is estimated that there will be a year end balance of approximately $1.8 million. This has been achieved over the past few years due to the fact that the City has spent less than budgeted, or revenues have come in higher than anticipated. The City is in a positive financial condition; however, changes in the economy will be monitored on an ongoing basis. The budget is seen as an effort to implement the goals and objectives of the City Council and the public. Manager Pomeranz described how these goals and objectives are gauged and achieved, and completed his review of the budget summary. He concluded by informing the audience that the City of Port Angeles has been awarded the Distinguished Budget Presentation Award by the Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada. The symbolism of this award is that the budget document the City has compiled clearly communicates the City's revenues, expenditures and fmancial condition. Any citizen can understand the contents of the document, which contains not only numbers but graphic illustrations and narratives which clearly describe the City's financial condition. At Deputy Mayor Sargent's request, Manager Pomeranz informed the audience that approximately 72% of the General Fund is expended for salaries. Deputy Mayor Sargent opened the public hearing at 7:45 p.m., and took a moment to express the Council's thanks to staff for all their diligent efforts in preparing this budget package. -2- 2627 CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 7, 1993 LEGISLATION: Carl Alexander, 235 W. 12th Street, referenced the revenue figure of $61 million, (Cont'd) which includes $2 million in reserves. He inquired if this money is in a fund or if the figure was added in to make the $61 million. Manager Pomeranz responded that 1994 Budget this comprised the reserves of the various funds. Mr. Alexander asked why the (Cont'd) expenditures minus revenues resulted in more than a $5 million difference. Finance Director Godbey responded that this was due to bond issues. Mr. Alexander indicated he had given a presentation on the City's 1993 budget, and the dOCument was excellent. He expressed certainty that the 1994 budget document would be just as good. Ed Benedict, 820 E. Fourth Street, expressed concern over the new property assessments, as his assessment was increased by 40 % and is not affordable. Director Godbey explained that the County is required to update its assessed valuations on an annual basis. They have been in arrears on this, so everyone saw a surge in property valuations. However, this doesn't mean taxes are going up a like amount. The City is restricted by law to no more than a 6 % increase. There being no further comment, Deputy Mayor Sargent closed the public hearing at 7:55 p.m. She informed the audience that there will be a budget work session tomorrow evening. Manager Pomeranz informed the Council that, due to a conflict, the meeting will be held in the Public Works Conference room, not the Council Chambers. Councilman Wight noted that several Council and staff members met with representatives of a group being taxed on pulltabs. This group has been invited to the work session and will make a brief presentation. They will also provide a written report to the Council for clarification. Highland Communities 2. HIGHLAND COMMUNITIES FINAL PLANNED RESIDENTIAL Final Planned Residential DEVELOPMENT (PRD) AND PLAT.. Final approval for Phase I and Phase Development and Plat H of the proposed development and plat, located between Lauridsen Boulevard and Melody Lane. Planning Director Collins distributed copies of a memo to the Council members, updating them on the status of this project. Deputy Mayor Sargent reviewed the information provided by the Planning Department and opened the public hearing at 7:56 p.m. Tim German, 2025 W. 12th Street, applicant, felt that from the very conceptions of this project he has worked diligently and responsibly to develop a much needed commodity in the community. He has worked with the neighbors to respond to their concerns. He felt he has answered all questions, and the project is ready to go forward tonight. Staff has asked some last minute questions, and Mr. German has brought professionals to the meeting to respond to these questions. Craig Miller, 230 E. Fifth Street, representative of the applicant, wished to address two issues and asked that Jerry Newlin of NTI address one issue. Mr. Miller informed the Council that the areas of concern were exterior boundary setbacks and an issue concerning buffer zones. Mr. German indicated to the Planning Commission that he wasn't able to come forward in response to the request for additional information until after he had an opportunity to consult with Counsel. The Planning Commission then recommended with a 5-0 vote that the matter be denied. Mr. Miller subsequently engaged in a series of lengthy meetings with the Planning Department and the City Attorney to attempt to rectify the situation. Mr. Miller informed the Council that it is the applicant's legal position that the application for final PRD approval fully complies with all setback requirements established by the preliminary PRD approval. The applicant and the Commission have different views as to what the conditions of the preliminary PRD approval were. Findings No. 7 - 12, on Page 3 of the memorandum from the Planning Department, reflect language that both parties could agree to and adequately deal with the issue. He felt this conclusion to be fully supported by the law and by the preliminary PRD approval. The second issue relates to the Planning Commission's recommendation that the PRD be remanded back to the Commission for review, with which Mr. Miller and his client had concern. The PRD was denied at the Planning Commission meeting, and Mr. Miller felt this ended the Commission's jurisdiction over the application and transferred it to the City Council. According to the PRD ordinance, after holding a public hearing, the Council could accept the Planning Commission's recommendation, reject the recommendation, or make modifications. Mr. Miller requested that the Council make some modifications in the Planning Commission's recommendations based upon discussions concerning what in fact constitutes the -3- 2628 CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 7, 1993 LEGISLATION: interpretation, and the PRD approval. (Cont'd) As far as Mr. Miller and his client were concerned, they were in full compliance Highland Communities with the preliminary I~RD approval, and the City Council should proceed to consider Final Planned Residential the application at this meeting and take final action. The Planning Commission DeVelopment and Plat should have voted to continue the hearing rather than deny the project so that Mr. (Cont'd) German could talk to counsel and determine whether or not he wanted to provide the additional information, and then return to the Planning Commission. Had this occurred, Mr. German would have settled all these issues at the last Planning Commission meeting and the project would be in front of the Council tonight in the same procedural mode as it presently is. Mr. German is suffering the loss of $5,000 to $10,000 per week in carrying costs on the project. If this doesn't go back to Planning Commission until January 12 as suggested, it will cost Mr. German a significant amount of money. Mr. Miller and his client felt this project was ready to be final approved two months ago. Another six weeks would result in a 14-week delay between the time the project was ready to be approved, and should have been approved, according to their point of view. Mr. Miller felt it is now the City Council's obligation to act on this and recommended they do so in accordance with the findings of fact submitted to the Council by the Planning Department. Jerry Newlin, 717 S. Peabody Street, principal engineer for NTI, has been in charge of all the engineering and geological work which has been done on this project. Mr. Newlin pointed out the area under discussion on the map attached to the Planning Department memo. Mr. Newlin felt that the bench area and the mound, which is the area under discussion, is not a natural feature. He theorized that perhaps this area had been logged many years ago, and this bench area was constructed as a ramp for log loading. The area is stable from a geological standpoint, and the mound can be graded without any problems. Mr. Newlin quoted from his report ~the bench area for Lots Al7 and A25 can be safely developed'. The proposed grading has been reviewed and found acceptable by the City Engineer. He pointed out that the Council had a copy of the memo from City Engineer Kenworthy to the Planning Commission stating this. He felt the grading issue was without merit. Councilman Hulett inquired if the drop from the mound to the bench was 12 feet. Mr. Newlin said yes, approximately. He further stated that NTI had done a detailed topography map of the area and reiterated that there was no evidence of geological instability.. Bob Winters, 1824 Harborcrest, designated representative for the Planning Commission, felt the issue under discussion was whether or not the Planning Commission considers it appropriate to be reviewing the plan before the Council tonight. The Commission is of the opinion that there are significant changes to this plan, to include changes to rear yard setbacks, consideration of reductions for the environmentally sensitive areas on the west boundary, and the request that grading occur in the buffered area. The Council has the option to remand this back to the Planning Commission for its consideration, which is what the Planning Commission has requested. Carl Alexander, 235 W. 12th Street, member of the Planning Commission, reminded the Council that the Planning Commission serves as its in-depth study group for issues of this nature. Mr. Alexander read section 17.70.150 of the PAMC regarding Planning Commission review of final PRDs. The Planning Commission could not recommend approval because there was not enough information provided by the applicant for at least two of the requirements. Application for a PRD is a four-step process, which Mr. Alexander summarized. Mr. Alexander expressed concern that if the Council acted on this item tonight, a precedent would be set whereby developers would feel they do not have to go through the Planning Commission. It would place the Council in the position of acting as its own Planning Commission, negating the purpose of the Planning Commission and setting a precedent of a two- step versus a four-step PRD process. Councilman Wight inquired whether or not Mr. Alexander had an opportunity to study the information which was in the Council's packet regarding this matter, to which Mr. Alexander responded in the negative. COuncilman Wight asked if any of the Planning Commission members had an opportunity to discuss with staff the negotiations and discussion which had taken place over the past two days. Mr. Alexander responded that he had briefly discussed it, but he could not speak for anyone else. Councilman Wight then asked if Mr. Alexander felt that there was now enough information for the Planning Commission to deliberate over and above what has already been done. Mr. Alexander felt that, based on discussions he has had with staff on what has been presented by the applicant, a decision could be reached. Essentially the information provided by the applicant to the Council was the information the Planning Commission needed to make a decision, which was not -4- 2629 CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 7, 1993 LEGISLATION: forthcoming when requested. (Cont'd) Deputy Mayor Sargent inquired of the City Attorney as to whether or not it was Highland Communities appropriate to question Planning Department staff on this issue and he replied Final Planned Residential affirmatively. Planning Director Collins explained that the memo distributed this Development and Plat evening was based on geotechnical information provided to staff by the applicant's (Cont'd) engineers. The Council set the public hearing date on November 16, and on November 22, the applicant provided staff with the topographical information which had been requested earlier in the month. Based on this information, the applicant's engineers were asked if their geotechnical analysis was changed. This information was provided to staff late last week, after the staff report had been sent to the Council. The City Engineer reviewed the information, and a meeting Was held on Monday, which was the first time Director Collins reviewed the information. The memo was written today after he spent most of the day working with 'the applicant to understand the issues and to make sure the Planning Department was prepared to . provide the Council with as much information as possible at this meeting. However, as indicated in the memo, Director Collins has not had time to resolve the issue raised by the grading plan presented to staff today. Director Collins stated, for the record, that City Engineer Kenworthy's review of recommended changes to the grading plan and was not an approval of the grading plan as presented. He clarified that it did not go to the Planning Commission as stated by Mr. Newlin, but rather went to the Planning Department. The Planning Commission has not reviewed the information and had not received the topographical information prior to its last public hearing. Director Collins stated that the mound is on top of the bench, and the bench is a natural feature. He bowed to Mr. Newlin's expertise as to whether or not the mound is a natural feature. The steepest drop in the area is approximately 80%, a 16-foot drop over approximately a 20-foot distance, which qualify as environmentally sensitive areas and are of concern in a PRD. The initial studies had failed to identify the environmentally sensitive area of the bench, and it wasn't until areas had been disturbed within the buffer area, which was a violation of some of the preliminary approval conditions, that this was discovered. The preliminary condition would have to be changed to allow for any clearing or grading to occur in those buffered areas. Mr. Miller had stated that the plans were ready for approval on October 13; however, Director Collins informed the Council that the original plans were submitted on May 19, and went through significant changes before resubmittal on October 5, updating on October 8, and on October 13 there were still problems needing resolution, which went through another series of plan submittals after the public hearing before the Planning Commission on October 13. A chronology of the plan sets was included in the Council packet. The Planning Commission had a copy of the fourth plan set at its last public hearing on November 10, but now there is a fifth plan set. It is not clear at which point the plan set was in such a condition that it could be approved and signed by the City officials. Hopefully the current plan set, which was modified as late as today, can be approved. Deputy Mayor Sargent inquired if she was correct in her interpretation from the memo that the City Engineer has suggested three more conditions be placed on the plan, and that these conditions have not been reviewed by the Planning Commission. Director Collins responded that it depended on interpretation of the decisions made on protecting the environmentally sensitive areas. He recommended that if the Council should proceed with this project tonight, the Council should make it conditioned upon approval of the disturbance of the buffer area only upon approval of the Planning Director. This would reflect a change to Condition No. 1 of those listed in the staff packet. Councilman Wight inquired if there was a legal requirement for the Council to schedule a public hearing if they remand this back to the Planning Commission, or could it simply be a public meeting. Attorney Knutson felt a public meeting would be acceptable, providing it was clear what was supposed to be under consideration. Councilman Wight felt that sometimes legalities get in the way of speed in resolving issues. Director Collins agreed the January 12 date noted in the staff memo was in the event there had to be a public hearing. If a public meeting would suffice, this could speed up the process. There is a Planning Commission meeting scheduled for December 15. Councilman Wight requested that the Planning Commission consider . this issue at the meeting on 12/15/93, and the City Council's public hearing be continued to 12/21/93; he further requested that Attorney Miller discuss this with his client. Attorney Miller wished to make a comment before discussing this with his client. He stated that he has followed City politics and processes for a long time. He suggested to Council that what the Planning Commission is requesting of the Council is unprecedented. This is not an extension of the process, but almost a perversion 2630 CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 7, 1993 LEGISLATION: of the process. It is improper for the Planning Commission to request the Council (Cont'd) to return this item to them for further consideration. Mr. Miller stated that this is not good government, it is giving the Planning Commission more authority than they Highland Communities should have. ~?M. ~ff ~r stated that he would discuss this with his client, but Final Planned Residential he wanted it under~to0d that it was under protest. Development and Plat (Cont'd) Councilman Wight informed Mr. Miller that he understood; however, he felt that there was disclosure of additional information that the Planning Commission did not have. Mr. Miller stated that if the Planning Commission wanted this information that badly, they should have continued the public hearing. They did not; they denied the plan. Therefore, they are finished and it is up to the Council. Councilman Wight also informed Mr. Miller that what the Council is doing is not without precedent, and while it may not be great government, it is practical government. Mr. Miller wished to make one further comment regarding the sensitive areas ordinance issues which had been addressed by Director Collins. Mr. Miller asked the Council to note that decisions concerning amendments to buffers and determinations as to whether areas are or are not geological hazard zones, is a matter that is, by ordinance, committed to the discretion of the Planning Director. Therefore, the suggestion Mr. Collins made regarding that matter is acceptable, and they are issues he can resolve. Break Deputy Mayor Sargent recessed for a break at 8:35 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 8:50 p.m. Mr. Miller stated that he and his client do not believe it is appropriate that this matter be remanded to the Planning Commission for any action. Mr. Miller further stated he was not even sure it was legal. Tim German, applicant, addressed the Council and stated that at the October 13 Planning Commission meeting, his plan was approved except for the question of what to do with the bench, which had been identified as environmentally sensitive. He was told by the Planning Department that this was a geological hazard area, and it had to have a 50-foot buffer. This is not what the ordinance says, and it took some time to decide what exactly the ordinance did say. On the memo distributed tonight on this issue, Page 3, it discusses buffers required for geological hazard areas. A geological hazard area can be developed and eliminated. Buffer requirements are stated in Section 15.20.70, which Mr. German then quoted. Mr. German felt he has shown that the area under discussion is stable and therefore, developable per the ordinance. He stated that the Planning Director agreed with this until he received a letter stating this should be graded. Again Mr. German repeated that according to ordinance it can be graded and developed. The City Engineer felt this was a good idea because once the mound is graded off the bench, the area becomes more stable. The other complaint of the Planning Commission is the rear yard setbacks on some of the lots; however, these were not changed from the original plan. The Planning Department is claiming to have made a mistake when the original plan was approved. The Planning Department had interpreted side yards to be rear yards, which need. bigger setbacks than shown on the plan. However, nothing had changed, they had always shown the same rear yards. It was approved with this information on the plat. Mr. German stated that questions were asked by the Planning Commission after they had given final approval. They requested information already given to the Planning Department, and if they interpreted the plans the way they wanted to, Mr. German was in jeopardy of having the whole PRD disqualified. At that point, he simply requested time to seek counsel before he submitted additional information. The Planning Commission had the opportunity to continue the matter; however, the Commission chose to deny. To send this back to the Planning Commission now puts undue hardship on Mr. German. He has always tried to answer all questions on this project; there has been no adverse testimony on the project. Mistakes have been made on both sides; he would like to see everyone learn from these errors and for the project to move on. Planning Director Collins clarified that on October 13, the Planning Commission did not approve development of the lots along the western Councilman Hulett asked if the Planning Commission's concerns had been addressed with the new findings. Director Collins responded that if the Council reviewed the November 10 Planning Commission minutes, it would fred that there was still concern over the buffer areas, restoration and landscaping. Director Collins did feel the buffer area issue had been resolved. He was unsure if the Planning Commission would find his resolution of the issue acceptable. Councilman Schueler inquired of the City Attorney if it was legal to remand this back to the Planning Commission. Attorney Knutson responded that the Council may remand this issue back to the Planning Commission. He referred to several City ordinance provisions which allow this. -6- 2631 CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 7, 1993 LEGISLATION: Linda Nutter, 1701 E. Third Street, a member of the Planning Commission, (Cont'd) expressed concern over the buffer area, environmentally sensitive areas, grading and rear yard setbacks. If the Council should remand this back to the Planning Highland Communities Commission, she asked that it be given enough room to consider all the problem Final Planned Residential areas. Councilman Schueler asked for clarification of Ms. Nutter's request and the Development and Plat Council's options. Attorney Knutson responded by stating that the Council could (Cont'd) either remand to the Planning Commission for its recommendation as to the appropriateness of the conditions, findings and conclusions being considered by the Council based on the new information provided by the applicant or could remand to the Planning Commission for its recommendation on specifically identified issues. Bob Winters, Planning Commission member, was of the opinion that the Planning commission would be comfortable focusing on a few items. He further stated that the Commission was concerned over the expeditiousness of the process and has no wish to belabor it any longer than necessary. There are, however, concerns which need to be addressed. The Planning Commission could do this without a public heating. There being no further testimony, Deputy Mayor Sargent closed the public hearing at 9:12 p.m. Councilman Wight moved to remand the Final PRD hack to the Planning Commission for a public meeting at its next meeting of December 15 to reconsider Findings 7, 8, 9, and 10 of the Planning Commission minutes of November 10, 1993, to take into consideration in its deliberations the testimony that was provided by NTI and others regarding the sensitive area in the bench, and the content of the staff report dated December 7, 1993, and the memo provided by the City Engineer dated December 6, 1993. Councilman Schueler seconded the motion. Councilman Wight indicated that precedent or n~x~ent is a legal issue that may or may not have to be played out in a differen~)mma tamer than before the City Council. His intent in making the motion was to attempt to find a way to continue to use the expertise of the Planning Commission and staff in the process. He further stated that, from time to time, the Council must refer things back to committees and commissions for further information. The PRD process is difficult and interpretive and tends to be adversarial; however, it still yields the opportunity for City government and developers to approach large scale projects and possibly have them turn out better than they might have if the City had no input. The resolution of the project may help the City "frae tune" its PRD ordinance and process. Councilman Schueler agreed with Councilman Wight's remarks, as he recalled another problem that had arisen with this project in the past regarding development. Director Collins stated that there were some issues raised in earlier meetings; however, they were resolved. He requested from Councilman Wight clarification of the references made to specific findings. Councilman Wight responded that they were the November 10 Planning Commission minutes Findings 7 through 10, and a reconsideration of conclusions A through C, the geotechnical information and the contents of the memo from Mr. Collins dated December 7. A vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. Councilman Wight moved to reopen the public hearing and continue it to December 21, 1993. Councilman Braun seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. The public hearing was, therefore, reopened at this time. B. Ordinances Not Requiring a Public Hearing None. Street Vacation Petition - C. Resolutions Not Requiring Public Hearings Register - Resolution No. 39-93 1. STREET VACATION PETITION - STV 93(12)07 - REGISTER, Portion of "L" Street: Request for vacation of a portion of "L " Street, set hearing for January 18, 1994. Deputy Mayor Sargent reviewed the information provided by the Planning Department. She then read the Resolution by title, entitled RESOLUTION NO. 39-93 A RESOLUTION of the City of Port Angeles setting a hearing date for a petition to vacate a portion of 'L' Street, Port Angeles, Washington. -7- 2632 CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 7, 1993 Councilman Braun moved to pass the Resolution as read by title. Councilman Ostrowski seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Planning Commission D. Planning Commission Minutes/Action Items Minutes/Action Items 1. Planning Commission Minutes of November 17, 1993 Councilman Hulett moved to accept the Planning Commission minutes of November 17, 1993. Councilman Wight seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. County Advisory Boards E. Other Considerations I. Reappointments to County Advisory Boards Deputy Mayor Sargent reviewed the information provided by the City Clerk. Councilman Ostrowski moved to forward a recommendation to Clallam County that Councilman Schueler be reappointed to the Public Health Advisory Committee for an additional term of one year and that Ronald Jadasohn be reappointed to the Fair Advisory Board for a four-year term. Councilman Braun seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Board of Adjustment/ 2. Appointments to Board of Adjustment and Utility Advisory Committee Utility Advisory Committee Appointments Deputy Mayor Sargent explained that currently there is an opening on the Board of Adjustment due to the resignation of Patsy Feeley. One candidate was interviewed earlier this evening. Councilman Schueler moved to appoint Dave Milligan to the Board of Adjustment to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Patsy Feeley, whose term expires 3/1196. Councilman Hulett seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Deputy Mayor Sargent asked Deputy Clerk Hagar to conduct a roll call vote to fill the vacancy on the Utility Advisory Committee. Deputy Mayor Sargent and each Council member individually cast ballots for Bill Myers, who was duly appointed to fill a term from 1/1/94 to 12/31/95. Deputy Mayor Sargent stated that the City was fortunate to have such good candidates volunteer for these positions, and that the Council appreciates the efforts put forth by those who serve on these boards. Deputy Mayor Sargent thanked all three gentlemen for making themselves available. Umbrella Services Request 3. Request by Umbrella Services for donation of ~blue house' on 5th Street and a lot at 5th and Albert Deputy Mayor Sargent reviewed the information provided by the Public Works Department and requested that Councilman Wight, as a member of the Real Estate Committee, review the proposal to the Council. Councilman Wight informed the Council that this project was related to the Serenity House proposal and was not a competitive project. Umbrella Services is working with the encouragement of Serenity House on this proposal. He advised the Council that the Assistant City Attorney reviewed the proposal and found that, presuming the figures obtained regarding the cost of removing the two buildings are reasonably accurate, there is value received by the City in a contract like this. The City would gain financial benefit and at the same time, help the project move forward. Also, if the project does proceed, there would be City- owned, undeveloped property on East Fifth Street which would presumably participate in an LID for street improvements on that portion of the street. Referring to the sketch attached to the application/information, the Real Estate Committee considered turning over Lot 17 and a portion of Lot 16 in order to allow enough land area to stay within RS-7 codes for a building footprint on the land and still protect the sensitive area setbacks from the bank as shown on the sketch. In considering all the square footage which may be available, there would still be a plus balance in value received on the part of the City compared to the outright sale of the lots and demolition of Hospice House and the other house at City expense. The Real Estate Committee has reconunended the project for approval by the City Council. Manager Pomeranz informed the Council that the City just received an offer on the white house this morning; it will be forwarded to the Real Estate Committee for rev. iew. ' 8 ' 2633 CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 7, 1993 LEGISLATION: Property Manager Ridout introduced the Director of Safe Homes, Laurey Hansen- (Cont'd) Carl of 2755 Towne Road, Sequim. Ms. Hansen-Carl reviewed for the Council the information in the Council packet. Manager Pomeranz asked Ms. Hansen-Carl if she Umbrella Services Request was sure she had the financial capacity to move the house. She responded that (Cont'd) Monroe Housing would be providing Umbrella Services with an estimate of the moving costs this coming week; estimates have already been received on rehabilitation costs. First Federal Savings & Loan has stated a willingness to carry the mortgage, money has been received from both the Sequim and Port Angeles Soroptimist clubs, a grant has been received from the Hailer Foundation in Sequim, another application is in for a grant from the ITT Foundation, and there is possibly money available through the State DV program. Councilman Ostrowski inquired of Ms. Hansen-Carl if she felt the six month time frame was feasible. She responded it is a tight schedule, but they would like to see the house in operation in May, 1994. However, if the Council would approve the six months with a possible three to six month extension if needed, it would make things more comfortable. Deputy Mayor Sargent reported she is a member of the Soroptimist Club who has made a commitment to the Safe Home/Rape Relief and will make a $3000 donation each year for the next three years. Property Manager Ridout felt that, with regard to the six month time frame, moving the building in as short a period of time as possible was important; after that the time period could be extended for rehabilitation of the house. Councilman Braun asked when it would be known whether or not the land would be able to accommodate the structure. Property Manager Ridout responded that as soon as the soil testing was done it would be known. Ms. Hansen-Carl thought she understood that Polaris, who is doing the soil testing, could let them know within a week or two of the test results. Councilman Ostrowski inquired as to whether or not this type of housing was allowed in the area under discussion. Director Collins indicated a CUP would be necessary for a group home. A CUP takes six to seven weeks to acquire; by then the soil analysis and foundation design should be done, and it will be known whether or not the land is suitable to accept the structure. Ms. Hansen-Carl concluded by advising the Council that 65 % of the clients sheltered are children. Councilman Wight moved to execute a contract for transfer of ownership of Lots 16 and 17 on Fifth Street between Albert and Vine in exchange for transfer/removal of the Rose Crumb Hospice House from its existing location to that location and for assistance as described in the memo provided by the Public Works Department for removal of the other white house there, unless other arrangements are made. Conditions on the contract would be that necessary City permits are obtained, a CUP for a group home be obtained, deeds shall be subject to conservation easements to protect the sensitive area of the bank and ravine area, and the applicant shall execute an LID no-protest agreement for upgrades on Fifth Street and there shall be buffering and fencing on top of the bank to protect any children that may eventually be living in the housing complex, and that Umbrella Services have six months to complete the removal and an additional six months to complete the reconstruction and begin the operation. Councilman Hulett seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Ediz Hook Lease Lots 4. Lease closure and payment with ITT Rayonier, Inc. for Ediz Hook Lease Lots Deputy Mayor Sargent reviewed the information provided by the Public Works Department. Councilman Ostrowski moved that the City accept the final payment offer of $8200.00 from ITT Rayonier and terminate the leases, if ITT is willing to relinquish the area in front of the Ediz Hook Boat Launch or issue a no-charge permit, and further, that the City Property Manager be authorized to final negotiations and sign the necessary completion papers, if all the terms of the final negotiations remain substantially the same as recommended and approved. Councilman Braun seconded the motion, which carried unanimously, Fine Arts Center 5. Contract Renewal for Fine ~Irt Center Director Deputy Mayor Sargent reviewed the information provided by the Parks and Recreation Department. She reminded the Council that this part of the budget has 2634 CITY COUNCIL MEETING Deceml~r 7, 1993 LEGISLATION: not yet been reviewed and, therefore, felt it was inappropriate to consider a contract (Cont'd) before it was known if there were available funds. Councilman Wight felt the Council could review the information provided and ask the President of the Fine Arts Fine Arts Center Board to comment ~on ~genue~ and expenditures. Should the Council choose to take (Cont'd) action tonight, it cOuld be made contingent upon budget approval. Jim Butler, President of the Fine Arts Board, distributed copies of a chart which demonstrated the Fine Arts Center's earnings projections for 1993/94, which he then reviewed with the Council. Based on these projections, the Fine Arts Center will have a surplus at the end of 1994 even if Mr. Seniuk is placed full time. In reviewing the balance sheet, the Fine Arts Center showed a deficit in the 1993, but, now the 1993 estimates show a surplus, Councilman Wight asked how this came about. Mr. Butler explained that because the FAC went with U.S. Bank and earnings were 15% rather than the 10.5% projected by the Finance Department, revenues were higher than anticipated. Surplus funds will be reinvested for 1994. It is a continually growing situation. The FAC gave U.S. Bank $700,000 and at the end of October, after paying bills, there was a balance of $714,000. Deputy Mayor Sargent expressed discomfort with playing the stock market. Projecting funds is one thing, actually having those funds is another. Mr. Butler reassured her that the FAC went with U.S. Bank because they are experts in this field, and he has found them to be conservative. Deputy Mayor Sargent also inquired as to whether or not summer hours would be extended for the Fine Arts Center if the Director is placed on full-time status, as currently it is only open Thursday through Sunday. Mr. Butler felt these questions should be answered by Mr. Seniuk, who informed the Council that extending the hours was tried several years by extending hours on Thursday night. It did not bring a lot of attendance and was abandoned. However, as the program grows, it is an important consideration. This summer, there will be three major shows and hours can be extended. He informed the Council that the opening of the Artery has greatly expanded its volunteer base and hopefully, these people can also be used to extend the hours of the Center. Mr. Butler introduced a Board member, the President and Vice President of the · Friends of the Fine Art Center who were in attendance this evening in support of this issue. Deputy Mayor Sargent asked Finance Director Godbey for her opinion of the analysis of the fund, and if she felt the figures presented were valid. Director Godbey responded that the Council should expect fluctuations in gains from year to year because of the nature of the market. It is projected that there will be a decline in the market in 1994 because some stocks have been overpriced. However, the foreign market looks strong, and the board is investing 20 - 25 % of their portfolio in foreign markets. Depending on the portfolio mix they might see a better gain than they are forecasting. It is difficult to forecast what will happen in the future with the market. Councilman Wight moved to renew the contract as outlined in Mr. Brodhun's memo dated December 2, 1993, contingent upon approval of the budget on December 21, 1993, and authorize the Mayor to sign the contract if that condition is met. Councilman Ostrowski seconded the motion. Councilman Wight just wished to remind the Council that this contract is subject to cancellation on the part of either party on a 30-day notice. The Trust fund and its earnings have always been uncertain. He further stated that the contract with Mr. Seniuk is based on a performance standard and evaluation, and it's designed to give a measure of stability to his employment. Mr. Seniuk is a valuable employee. Mid- term adjustments can be made to the contact should the financial picture warrant it. Councilman Wight also felt that if finances decreased the Friends of the Fine Arts Centers and the Board of Trustees would attempt to maintain the financial stability of the Center. There being no further discussion, a vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. Meeting Extended Councilman Braun moved to extend the meeting past 10:00 p.m. Councilman Past 10 p.m. Hulett seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. Surplus Property 6. Consideration of Declaration of Surplus and Authorization of Sale' of City Equipment Deputy Public Works Director Ridout informed the Council that some of the equipment listed is potentially worth more than the $5,000 limit. The Public Works Department is recommending delay of this item to the next Council meeting so a -'10 - 2635 CITY COUNCIL MEETING December 7, 1993 public hearing can be scheduled in order to-surplus the vehicles. Criminal Justice 7. Optional Sales Tax for Criminal Justice Funding Funding - Resolution No. 40-93 Deputy Mayor Sargent explained that this came about as a result of a meeting between the City and the County Commissioners. The City informed the County that they would be willing to work with the County on this and not obligate the City's share of the Criminal Justice Funding if the County Commissioners would enact the optional sales tax, and that is what this resolution is saying. Deputy Mayor Sargent read a portion of the resolution to the Council. Deputy Mayor Sargent read the Resolution by title, entitled RESOLUTION NO. 40-93 A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of Port Angeles, Washington requesting the Board of County Commissioners to implement the local option sales tax for Criminal Justice Funding. Deputy Mayor Sargent reminded the Council that a letter had been sent several months ago, requesting that the County Commissioners implement this tax. Councilman Ostrowski moved to pass the Resolution as read by title. Councilman Braun seconded the motion. Councilman Wight suggested inserting the words "during 1994" in the paragraph beginning BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED after the words criminal justice funds. If this is carded over to 1995, it gives the City some latitude. This was agreed to by Councilman Ostrowski as the maker of the motion and Councilman Braun as the second. Councilman Wight reviewed the meeting with the County Commissioners. After further discussion, a vote was taken on the motion, which carried unanimously. ADJOURNMENT: The~O_ a ~bt ~tmeeting was adjoumed._/~ ~/_~;-~_ A~at 10:30 p.m. -11 -